proc_exec

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations provided. Description only says 'executes a command', but does not disclose potential side effects, security implications, or that it requires an established SSH session. For a remote execution tool, this is a significant gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single sentence with no wasted words. Could be slightly improved by adding a brief note on session requirement or return value, but current is efficient.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Despite having 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description fails to explain prerequisites (session must be open), return format, or safe usage tips. Incomplete for a potentially destructive operation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

All 4 parameters are described in the schema (100% coverage). The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states 'executes a command on the remote system' with a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tool 'proc_sudo' which also executes commands.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like proc_sudo, or any prerequisites (e.g., need an open SSH session). No when-not or exclusion criteria mentioned.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.